[
Amatucci, A. (2016), ‘Foundation of the contemporary ability-to-pay principle in taxation in the thought of Saint Thomas Aquinas,’ in H. Jochum et al. (eds.) Practical Problems in European and International Tax Law: Essays in Honour of Manfred Mössner, Amsterdam: IBFD, ch. 1.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cadbury Schweppes plc and Cadbury Schweppes Overseas v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue [2006], CJEU C-196/04, ECLI:EU:C:2006:544.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Cédelle, A. (2016), The EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive: A UK Perspective, Oxford University Center for Business Taxation Working Paper Series, WP 16/14.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Collier, R.; Kari, S.; Ropponen, O.; Simmler, M. & Todtenhaupt, M. (2018), Dissenting the EU’s Recent Anti-Tax Avoidance Measures: Merits and Problem, EconPol Policy Report, no. 08, vol. 2.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Commission Proposal for a Council Directive laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market, COM(2016) 26 final, 2016/0011 (CNS), 28.1.2016.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and Council for an Action plan to strengthen the fight against tax fraud and tax evasion, COM (2012) 8806 final, 6.12.2012.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, OJ C 326, 26.10.2012, pp. 47–200.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Council Directive 2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States, OJ L 157, 26.6.2003, pp. 49–54.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Council Directive (EU) 2011/96/EU of 30 November 2011 on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States (recast), OJ L 345, 29.12.2011, p. 8.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016 on laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market, OJ L 193, 19.7.2016, pp. 1–14.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
de Wilde, M. F. (2018), ‘Is the ATAD’s GAAR a Pandora’s box?’ in P. Pistone & D. Weber (eds.) The Implementation of Anti-BEPS Rules in the EU: A Comprehensive Study, Amsterdam: IBFD, pp. 301–328. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.304070910.2139/ssrn.3040709
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Estonian Commercial Code, RT I 1995, 26, 355; RT I, 28.02.2019, 1.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Estonian Income Tax Act, RT I 1999, 101, 903; RT I, 19.03.2019, 13.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Estonian Law of Obligations Act, RT I 2001, 81, 487; RT I, 20.02.2019, 2.10.31080/ASGIS.2019.02.0054
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Estonian Taxation Act, RT I 2002, 26, 150; RT I, 06.11.2019, 1.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Explanatory memorandum to the bill of law no. 705 SE on amendments to the Income Tax Act, Estonian Parliament, 12.12.2018. Retrieved from https://www.riigikogu.ee/tegevus/eelnoud/eelnou/97180f59-7b6f-4797-aa2d-d6604039633b [accessed 1 Jan 2020]
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gutmann, D. et al. (2017), ‘The impact of the ATAD on domestic systems: a comparative survey,’ European Taxation, vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 2–20.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Her Majesty’s Commissioners of Revenue and Customs v. Newey [2013], CJEU C-653/11, ECLI:EU:C:2013:409.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kallas v. Estonia [2017], Criminal Chamber of the Estonian Supreme Court, no. 1-15-9051, 6.10.2017.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kõrgesaar v. Tax Board [2001], Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court, no. 3-3-1-57-00, 15.1.2001.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lazarov, I. & Govind, S. (2019), ‘Carpet-bombing tax avoidance in Europe: examining the validity of the ATAD under EU law,’ Intertax, vol. 47, no. 10, pp. 852–868.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lehis, L. (2012), Maksuõigus [Tax law], 3rd ed., Tallinn: Juura.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lenaerts, K. & Gutiérrez-Fons, J. A. (2013), To Say What the Law of the EU Is: Methods of Interpretation and the European Court of Justice, Distinguished Lecture delivered on the occasion of the XXIV Law of the European Union course of the Academy of European Law, on 6 July 2013, EUI Working Papers, AEL 2013/9.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lind, K. (2003), ‘Tulu mõiste’ [The definition of income], Juridica, no. 5, pp. 338–348.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Maisuradze, L. (2017), The Anti-Avoidance Directive and its Compatibility with Primary EU Law, MA thesis defended at the Faculty of Law of the University of Lund.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Maret Lilleorg v. Tax Board [2012], Administrative Chamber of the Estonian Supreme Court, no. 3-3-1-79-11, 13.2.2012.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Marge Sirge v. Tax Board [2011], Administrative Chamber of Estonian Supreme Court, no. 3-3-1-15-11, 25.4.2011.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
N Luxembourg 1 and Others v. Skatteministeriet [2019], CJEU Joined Cases C-115/16, C-118/16, C-119/16 and C-299/16, ECLI:EU:C:2019:134.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
O. and B. v. Minister voor Immigratie, Integratie en Asiel [2014], CJEU C-456/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:135.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Opinion of the Advocate General Mr Leger in the case of C-196/04 Cadbury Schweppes plc and Cadbury Schweppes Overseas v. Commissioners of Inland Revenue, 2006 I-07995, 2.5.2006, ECLI:EU:C:2006:278.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
OÜ AH Seenior v. Tax Board [2017], Administrative Chamber of the Estonian Supreme Court, no. 3-3-1-78-16, 9.6.2017.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Philip Morris Brands SARL and Others v. Secretary of State for Health [2016], CJEU C-547/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:325.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Piantavigna, P. (2018), ‘The role of the subjective element in tax abuse and aggressive tax planning,’ World Tax Journal, vol. 10, no. 2.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Pistone, P. et al., eds. (2019), Fundamentals of Taxation: An Introduction to Tax Policy, Tax Law and Tax Administration, Amsterdam: IBFD.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Polbud — Wykonawstwo [2017], CJEU C-106/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:804.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Rigaut, A. (2016), ‘European Union – anti-tax avoidance Directive (2016/1164): new EU policy horizons,’ European Taxation, vol. 56, no. 11, pp. 504–505.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Saare, K.; Volens, U.; Vutt, A. & Vutt, M. (2015), Ühinguõigus I [Company law], Tallinn: Juura.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Schønberg, S. & Frick, K. (2003), ‘Finishing, refining, polishing: on the use of travaux preparatoires as an aid to the interpretation of community legislation,’ European Law Review, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 149–171.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Statement by the Committee on Taxation 2015/16:SkU28, Subsidiarity check of proposal for a Council Directive laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market (COM(2016) 26). Reasoned opinion from the Swedish Parliament. Retrieved from https://secure.ipex.eu/IPEXL-WEB/scrutiny/CNS20160011/serik.do [accessed 1 Jan 2020]
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zimmer, F. (2019), ‘OECD/European Union/International – In Defence of General Anti-Avoidance Rules,’ Bulletin for International Taxation, vol. 73, no. 4.
]Search in Google Scholar
